ABDUL REHMAN Versus State
This matter arises from a criminal petition seeking post-arrest bail in a case registered under Sections 302 and 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question concerns whether the petitioner is entitled to post-arrest bail based on further inquiry and the rule of consistency, given that a co-accused had already been granted bail and the medical evidence created doubt regarding the cause of death and specific attributions. The Lahore High Court accepted the petition and held that the case fell within the scope of further inquiry under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Applying the rule of consistency with the co-accused's earlier bail grant and noting the lack of specific weapon attribution and ascertainable cause of death in the initial report, the court exercised its discretion to grant bail to the petitioner subject to surety bonds.
- Whether post-arrest bail can be granted on the basis of the rule of consistency when a co-accused has already been released on bail?
- Does a discrepancy between the F.I.R. and the medical report regarding weapon attribution bring a case within the scope of further inquiry?
- Whether the absence of an ascertainable cause of death warrants the grant of bail under Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 322, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
SH. AZMAT SAEED, J .--Criminal Miscellaneous 1636-B of 2007 filed on behalf of the petitioner Abdul Rehman seeking post arrest bail arises from case F.I.R. No.120, dated 12-5-2006 registered with Police Station Muzafar Abad District Multan for offences under sections 302/34, P.P.C.
2. The precise allegation as embodied in the F.I.R. is that, petitioner and the co-accused Ashiq Hussain gave beating to deceased. The co-accused was allegedly sitting on the chest of the deceased while the petitioner held his arms. Complainant and the P.Ws. intervened and rescued the victim who subsequently died.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that prosecution version does not find support from the medical as well as Chemical Examiner's report. Adds that petitioner did not use any weapon and there is no specific attribution to him and no previous enmity exists between the petitioner and deceased motivating the petitioner to do away with the deceased. Adds that police during the investigation concluded that no offence under section 302, P.P.C. was made out and in fact section 322, P.P.C. was attracted. which does not fall within the ambit of prohibitory clause to section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. Learned counsel for the State controverts the assertion and opposes the grant of bail on the ground that petitioner is involved in a heinous offence.
5. Admittedly, the co-accused of the petitioner namely Ashiq Hussain has already been granted bail by this Court vide order, dated 6-2-2007 in Criminal Miscellaneous No.3634-B of 2006. There is no reference of any sharp edged injury alleged to have been inflicted by the petitioner in the F.I.R. though mentioned in the MLR. Cause of death is also not ascertainable. The aforesaid brings the case of the petitioner within the four corners of further inquiry, and by following the rule of consistency, I am inclined to exercise of discretion in his favour with the consequence that petitioner shall be released on bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 150,000 with two sureties each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
H.B.T./A-24/L Bail granted.